Tongue in cheek you say? I see no evidence to support that, save your claim that it is at least. And every reason to believe contrary to your claim.
And yes I do boast a healthy if not twisted sense of humor.

Now as to telling me I'm a atheist. Why exactly are you presuming to tell me what I am? No, my stance is and continues to be that we just don't
know. That the larger question probly is unanswerable. I entertain the idea that god(s) do exist as much as I do they don't.

But, it's funny that you would claim to be misrepresented then proceed to do the same thing you accuse of and complain about others doing to still
others.

Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
Now as to telling me I'm a atheist. Why exactly are you presuming to tell me what I am? No, my stance is and continues to be that we just don't know.
That the larger question probly is unanswerable. I entertain the idea that god(s) do exist as much as I do they don't.

Atheism/theism has nothing to do with knowledge, rather.. belief.

Agnosticism/gnosticism are terms specific to knowledge.

Hence, you can be both agnostic and atheist (as I am). I also entertain the idea that god(s) could exist though I remain atheist as the default since
I no no good reason to believe the claim that deities exist.

...I'm without epistemological certainty, which is the definition of agnostic. Can I be relatively certain? Sure. As awake_and_aware points out, I'm
fairly certain there aren't teapots orbiting other planets. I can't be 100% sure that Carl Sagan didn't load some probe with a teapot just because
he's awesome, but I'm relatively certain.

Tongue in cheek you say? I see no evidence to support that, save your claim that it is at least.

This thread was made a while back when there was a thread of similar title regarding Christianity. I wanted to illustrate that Christians were
claiming to be persecuted at a time when there were a wide variety of threads that outright attacked atheists (not just the concepts of atheism). I
wanted to make a mockery of the idea that Christians on these forums were being persecuted by highlighting that atheists were the ones actually being
attacked.

And every reason to believe contrary to your claim. And yes I do boast a healthy if not twisted sense of humor.

Please, show me a piece of evidence that is contrary to my claim.

Now as to telling me I'm a atheist. Why exactly are you presuming to tell me what I am? No, my stance is and continues to be that we just don't know.
That the larger question probly is unanswerable. I entertain the idea that god(s) do exist as much as I do they don't.

...and yet you're not actively believing in them, therefore you're an atheist. That's the crux of the argument. So long as you're not believing in a
deity you are an atheist. If the light isn't on, it's off. If we represent the idea of holding a positive belief as a light bulb, yours is off, making
you an atheist. An agnostic atheist.

I also entertain the idea that gods exist, I merely don't believe it. I'll listen to arguments that gods exist, I'll thoroughly examine proposed
evidence of the ideas that some deity exists, but that doesn't mean I'm not an atheist.

Atheist means 'not believing', it has nothing to do with being stubborn. The atheist/agnostic split that you're proposing is something that has been
highly influenced by Christians. My evidence of this? Your own agnosticism thread in your signature which features a big ol' article from a Catholic
theologian.

You're playing into the Christians' hands.

But, it's funny that you would claim to be misrepresented then proceed to do the same thing you accuse of and complain about others doing to still
others.

I'm not misrepresenting you. You do not believe in any deity. You may entertain the possibility, but you are not engaged in the activity of believing
in any deity.

If someone doesn't know of the idea of a deity, they are also atheists. Babies? Atheists.

I'm sorry, but how does what I'm doing compare to a thread like "Atheism" which is basically an ignorance based attack on atheists rather
than atheism compare to me:

Making a rant saying I'm not obsessed with religion (because I'm obsessed with film)
Attacking the intelligent design argument (a hobby of Ken Miller, biologist and Catholic)
Starting a thread that's trying to help theists and atheists alike overcome solipsism, the idea that everyone thinks like you.
Pointing out an inconsistency in the Bible on the concept of God being love while not matching the description of love presented in the Bible.
Pointing out an inconsistency on the omniscience and divinity of Jesus
A little thread on thinking outside the box
A thread providing evidence of evolution
A joke rant about not getting PMs telling me I'm going to hell (which was met with a few PMs jokingly telling me that I will be)
A thread that provided a resource to a skeptical breakdown of the Qu'ran
A thread asking Christians to do what their Bible claims they should be able to
And a thread promoting a friend's recent music video...

Ah, you'd rather just use weaselly language to paint me as some atheist fundamentalist.

Discussing ideas is not the same thing as spreading falsehoods about a group of people.

Take that how you will.

I'll take it as the logical fallacy that it is.

But to actually review the situation, let's look at the two largest religious forums, CIR and F&T.

I see 2 threads about atheism, 1 is started by an atheist. The rest are all religious in nature, questioning religion, or discussing religion.

Really now? "I am an athiest (sic)" is definitely not started by an atheist and seems to be an anti-atheist individual trolling. There's Typical's
'I am a theist" thread which intentionally misrepresents the idea of being an atheist even though it's been explained to him a number of times. And
the one little thread with a single word title garnered three hundred responses in two days.

Then there's the giant straw man thread about non-believers who supposedly think science has all the answers...so...yeah. That's four now. Right
below it is 'when was atheism founded'. Five. Apparently you either can't count or don't know how to scroll on your web browser.

Volume isn't just in thread numbers. You should know that I'm unable to change the thread title, but the main reason I'm bumping this thread is
because I'm seeing an influx of threads that get a lot of attention that are simple ignorant attacks against atheists. Thread pops up, gets a few
hundred responses, goes away.

So... don't know what to tell ya.

That you can take your logical fallacies home with you, because they're not wanted here.

Your point was that studies are slanted towards the bias of the study maker, yet I've not seen a study that shows that atheists are less intelligent
than theists. In fact, all the studies I've shown is that the average atheist has higher reading/writing levels, intelligence levels, and knowledge
of religion than their theistic counterparts.

Some of these studies were carried out by the Templeton foundation...which actively seeks to demonstrate the opposite position. They did a study study
attempting to prove the power of prayer in healing....and then they did the honest thing and still published the results when they found out that the
results actually showed that patients who received prayer were worse off.

The comparison to my own thread list is ridiculous...mainly because my threads deal with specific issues. If you notice, only two of them refer
to Christians specifically rather than Christian concepts. One refers to how the "No True Scotsman" fallacy arises when definitions of Christian are
proposed and the other deals with how Christians who toss out condemnations of moderate Muslims for not condemning terrorism (even though they do it
often enough) were not condemning the attempts at suppression of secularism in my nation in the theocratic attempts to prevent legalized divorce.

I also had a bone to pick with agnostics, but it was a semantics issue not one of personal attack and I did my best to remain cordial throughout that
thread.

Hi Op - I'm new member here.....whilst scrolling the "Religion, Faith, And Theology" i noticed quite a few attacks on "Atheists" or "Atheist",
but i must admit; i noticed quite a few zelous non-believers who were taking a similar approach towards Theism (or a simple belief in God) - It's
pleasing that there are Atheists like you sending the right message, and taking the more civil approach.

Whilst i disagree with aggressive attacks on individual believers, i do support freedom of speech; this inherently means that Religion or the
philosophy of religion is NOT free from challenge or debate.

Whilst i condemn "aggressive" or "emotional" attacks on religion, the burden of proof as always been on those making the claim;

.......why should Atheists be condemned just because they are skeptical in regards to a positive unprovable claim?

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.